|
|
Post by fjenkins on Dec 11, 2018 23:36:23 GMT
Fergie Jenkins went into the Hall as a Cub and they did NOT retire his number 31 until Maddux went into the hall and they had to retire HIS #31 and realized it was also Fergie's number. That is one of the biggest bullls't things I've seen. Now Smith is going into the Hall as a Cub. Do they retire his number or wait?
Incidentally, the White Sox retired Baines number while he was still playing.
|
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 11, 2018 23:49:52 GMT
It always seemed lame and insincere when a team retires a number way after he retires. If you’re good enough to get your number retired, do it within a year after his retirement.
|
|
|
|
Post by fjenkins on Dec 12, 2018 0:00:06 GMT
It always seemed lame and insincere when a team retires a number way after he retires. If you’re good enough to get your number retired, do it within a year after his retirement. The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 12, 2018 0:15:33 GMT
It always seemed lame and insincere when a team retires a number way after he retires. If you’re good enough to get your number retired, do it within a year after his retirement. The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. I would think a lot of teams do what the Phillies do and have a Wall of Fame to honor good players that don’t quite deserve to have their number retired. Examples on the Phillies would be John Kruk and Darren Daulton. They have a few separate retired numbers - Schmidt, Carlton, Bunning, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by nutsberryfarm 🏜 on Dec 12, 2018 0:46:53 GMT
bartman robbing banks?
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Dec 12, 2018 5:35:04 GMT
It always seemed lame and insincere when a team retires a number way after he retires. If you’re good enough to get your number retired, do it within a year after his retirement. The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. Red Sox retired Pesky’s #6 because he coached for the organization for 600 years. Many players who did more on the field who didn’t get their numbers retired . Dewey Evans, Fred Lynn, Lefty Grove, Dom DiMaggio, Jimmie Foxx. Grove and Foxx were HOFers but I guess they are more A’s than Red Sox |
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Dec 12, 2018 7:09:13 GMT
The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. Red Sox retired Pesky’s #6 because he coached for the organization for 600 years. Many players who did more on the field who didn’t get their numbers retired . Dewey Evans, Fred Lynn, Lefty Grove, Dom DiMaggio, Jimmie Foxx. Grove and Foxx were HOFers but I guess they are more A’s than Red Sox There was nothing wrong with the Sox retiring Johnny Pesky's number, he was a part of the organization for decades and has an iconic part of Fenway named after him. Not sure why Fred Lynn's number should be retired, he wasn't in Boston all that long. Dom DiMaggio's should be. Would love to see Dwight Evans get his due, but that number was also worn by Manny Ramirez and currently by David Price, so not sure what they'll do with #24. Manny deserves it as much as Dewey. I don't care about Lefty Grove or Jimmy Foxx. They should retire Jason Veritek's #33. |
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Dec 12, 2018 7:29:03 GMT
Red Sox retired Pesky’s #6 because he coached for the organization for 600 years. Many players who did more on the field who didn’t get their numbers retired . Dewey Evans, Fred Lynn, Lefty Grove, Dom DiMaggio, Jimmie Foxx. Grove and Foxx were HOFers but I guess they are more A’s than Red Sox There was nothing wrong with the Sox retiring Johnny Pesky's number, he was a part of the organization for decades and has an iconic part of Fenway named after him. Not sure why Fred Lynn's number should be retired, he wasn't in Boston all that long. Dom DiMaggio's should be. Would love to see Dwight Evans get his due, but that number was also worn by Manny Ramirez and currently by David Price, so not sure what they'll do with #24. Manny deserves it as much as Dewey. I don't care about Lefty Grove or Jimmy Foxx. They should retire Jason Veritek's #33. Not saying all the numbers should be retired. Red Sox aren’t the Yankees. Just that a case could be made to honor them. Foxx and Grove were the turning point, the end of the bumbling 20’s. The Red Sox might have moved and not the Braves if Yawkey hadn’t bought them. And they were two of the best players ever. Fred Lynn in Boston was as good as any one. Better than Rice. If the Sox had kept him, he might be in the Hall. What will become of #21? To my recollection, no one has had it since Clemens. He deserves it but the Roid factor, plus the bitchy exit and his Yankees success might make it unofficially retired, like OJ’s #32 with the Bills. |
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Dec 12, 2018 7:37:23 GMT
There was nothing wrong with the Sox retiring Johnny Pesky's number, he was a part of the organization for decades and has an iconic part of Fenway named after him. Not sure why Fred Lynn's number should be retired, he wasn't in Boston all that long. Dom DiMaggio's should be. Would love to see Dwight Evans get his due, but that number was also worn by Manny Ramirez and currently by David Price, so not sure what they'll do with #24. Manny deserves it as much as Dewey. I don't care about Lefty Grove or Jimmy Foxx. They should retire Jason Veritek's #33. Not saying all the numbers should be retired. Red Sox aren’t the Yankees. Just that a case could be made to honor them. Foxx and Grove were the turning point, the end of the bumbling 20’s. The Red Sox might have moved and not the Braves if Yawkey hadn’t bought them. And they were two of the best players ever. Fred Lynn in Boston was as good as any one. Better than Rice. If the Sox had kept him, he might be in the Hall. What will become of #21? To my recollection, no one has had it since Clemens. He deserves it but the Roid factor, plus the bitchy exit and his Yankees success might make it unofficially retired, like OJ’s #32 with the Bills. Hey, I love Fred Lynn, but he was only there for 4 years or so. And he wasn't better than Rice, stop it. Who knows what they do with #21, it seems like things have thawed with Clemens. I think eventually they'll retire the Rocket's number. |
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Dec 12, 2018 15:36:47 GMT
It always seemed lame and insincere when a team retires a number way after he retires. If you’re good enough to get your number retired, do it within a year after his retirement. The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. I don't think that's true. A lot of guys have terrific careers who don't end up in the hall but are worthy of honoring by the team and fans. You mentioned the Astros. I don't know who they have retired or whatnot, but I wouldn't be opposed if they had retired someone's number like Mike Scott, a guy who had a terrific 9-year stint with them. It doesn't water anything down or belittle someone else's accomplishments in any way. I'm assuming the Mets will retire David Wright's number within the next year or so and that doesn't bother me one bit as a Met fan. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 12, 2018 16:13:03 GMT
The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. I don't think that's true. A lot of guys have terrific careers who don't end up in the hall but are worthy of honoring by the team and fans. You mentioned the Astros. I don't know who they have retired or whatnot, but I wouldn't be opposed if they had retired someone's number like Mike Scott, a guy who had a terrific 9-year stint with them. It doesn't water anything down or belittle someone else's accomplishments in any way. I'm assuming the Mets will retire David Wright's number within the next year or so and that doesn't bother me one bit as a Met fan. Of the members of the recent Phillies, I think Rollins gets his number retired, and Utley, Howard, Victorino, Ruiz, and Hamels go up on the Wall of Fame. Rollins is at or near the top in a bunch of franchise categories. The others, while fan favorites and great in their own right, I don’t see them getting their numbers retired. |
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Dec 12, 2018 16:20:11 GMT
I don't think that's true. A lot of guys have terrific careers who don't end up in the hall but are worthy of honoring by the team and fans. You mentioned the Astros. I don't know who they have retired or whatnot, but I wouldn't be opposed if they had retired someone's number like Mike Scott, a guy who had a terrific 9-year stint with them. It doesn't water anything down or belittle someone else's accomplishments in any way. I'm assuming the Mets will retire David Wright's number within the next year or so and that doesn't bother me one bit as a Met fan. Of the members of the recent Phillies, I think Rollins gets his number retired, and Utley, Howard, Victorino, Ruiz, and Hamels go up on the Wall of Fame. Rollins is at or near the top in a bunch of franchise categories. The others, while fan favorites and great in their own right, I don’t see them getting their numbers retired. Exactly, I'd agree with that, those guys were instrumental in a WS win so they should be commemorated in some way, although I could see them retiring Utley's number. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 12, 2018 17:37:21 GMT
Of the members of the recent Phillies, I think Rollins gets his number retired, and Utley, Howard, Victorino, Ruiz, and Hamels go up on the Wall of Fame. Rollins is at or near the top in a bunch of franchise categories. The others, while fan favorites and great in their own right, I don’t see them getting their numbers retired. Exactly, I'd agree with that, those guys were instrumental in a WS win so they should be commemorated in some way, although I could see them retiring Utley's number. I suppose if one could bet on such a thing in Vegas I’d place a hundred or so on Utley getting his number retired. He’s nearly as beloved in this town as Brian Dawkins and Allen Iverson. I’ve seen various arguments that he’s an actual hall of famer. I don’t see that. WAR alone shouldn’t be enough to get you in. But they want to retire his number? Ok, sure, have at it. |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Dec 12, 2018 17:51:42 GMT
Fergie Jenkins went into the Hall as a Cub and they did NOT retire his number 31 until Maddux went into the hall and they had to retire HIS #31 and realized it was also Fergie's number. That is one of the biggest bullls't things I've seen. Now Smith is going into the Hall as a Cub. Do they retire his number or wait? Incidentally, the White Sox retired Baines number while he was still playing. No but I'm sure he'll be invited to more Cubs special occasions for no other reason. Blue Jays have honoured numbers & only Alomar's #12 retired. I guess that's an alright move. Esp in the 21st century after decades & decades of players around the big 4 sports, only so many numbers. Might as well make retirements more exclusive. Baines' # was retired after he was moved to the Rangers, or so I wiki read last week upon the HOF thread we had. edit: Halladay's #32 also retired* |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 12, 2018 17:56:21 GMT
Fergie Jenkins went into the Hall as a Cub and they did NOT retire his number 31 until Maddux went into the hall and they had to retire HIS #31 and realized it was also Fergie's number. That is one of the biggest bullls't things I've seen. Now Smith is going into the Hall as a Cub. Do they retire his number or wait? Incidentally, the White Sox retired Baines number while he was still playing. No but I'm sure he'll be invited to more Cubs special occasions for no other reason. Blue Jays have honoured numbers & only Alomar's #12 retired. I guess that's an alright move. Esp in the 21st century after decades & decades of players around the big 4 sports, only so many numbers. Might as well make retirements more exclusive. Baines' # was retired after he was moved to the Rangers, or so I wiki read last week upon the HOF thread we had. I can see the Jays retiring Halladay’s number. |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Dec 12, 2018 18:05:05 GMT
double post cuz sexy spam online bs |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Dec 12, 2018 18:06:13 GMT
No but I'm sure he'll be invited to more Cubs special occasions for no other reason. Blue Jays have honoured numbers & only Alomar's #12 retired. I guess that's an alright move. Esp in the 21st century after decades & decades of players around the big 4 sports, only so many numbers. Might as well make retirements more exclusive. Baines' # was retired after he was moved to the Rangers, or so I wiki read last week upon the HOF thread we had. I can see the Jays retiring Halladay’s number. Already there I see. March 2018, Doc's #32 both retired & name added to level of excellence. I'd not been to a game last season so I didn't see first hand. |
|
|
|
Post by fjenkins on Dec 12, 2018 19:50:11 GMT
The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. Red Sox retired Pesky’s #6 because he coached for the organization for 600 years. Many players who did more on the field who didn’t get their numbers retired . Dewey Evans, Fred Lynn, Lefty Grove, Dom DiMaggio, Jimmie Foxx. Grove and Foxx were HOFers but I guess they are more A’s than Red Sox With Baines getting in the hall I think this opens the door for Dewey. |
|
|
|
Post by fjenkins on Dec 12, 2018 19:53:55 GMT
The Cubs were one of the last teams to wait until a player went to the Hall before retiring their number, which in my opinion, is as it should be. Then they stopped doing that when they retired Santo's number, who eventually went to the Hall. Both the Red Sox and Giants did the same thing - Sox retired Pesky's number and the Giants just retired Bonds (Mariners retired Martinez too) meaning the only team left with the rule is the A's. There are a few teams who have only Hall of Famers #s retired but some becames HOFers after they were retired. Teams like the Padres and Astros retire numbers for the sake of having retired numbers and it waters down the honor. Even the statue is now a watered down honor. I don't think that's true. A lot of guys have terrific careers who don't end up in the hall but are worthy of honoring by the team and fans. You mentioned the Astros. I don't know who they have retired or whatnot, but I wouldn't be opposed if they had retired someone's number like Mike Scott, a guy who had a terrific 9-year stint with them. It doesn't water anything down or belittle someone else's accomplishments in any way. I'm assuming the Mets will retire David Wright's number within the next year or so and that doesn't bother me one bit as a Met fan. The Astros are the worst of all the teams. They retired Jim Umbricht, who played a whole 2 seasons with them and died from cancer. Don Wilson, Jose Cruz, Larry Dierker, and even Jimmy Wynn, good players. Do a wall of fame. But retiring their numbers puts them up there with Ryan, Biggio and Bagwell. You just retire number of solid players but not all time greats you water down the honor big time. Used to be a retired number was the highest honor next to the HOF. Now it's just something they do for a lot of guys who were good players. |
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Dec 12, 2018 20:27:08 GMT
I don't think that's true. A lot of guys have terrific careers who don't end up in the hall but are worthy of honoring by the team and fans. You mentioned the Astros. I don't know who they have retired or whatnot, but I wouldn't be opposed if they had retired someone's number like Mike Scott, a guy who had a terrific 9-year stint with them. It doesn't water anything down or belittle someone else's accomplishments in any way. I'm assuming the Mets will retire David Wright's number within the next year or so and that doesn't bother me one bit as a Met fan. The Astros are the worst of all the teams. They retired Jim Umbricht, who played a whole 2 seasons with them and died from cancer. Don Wilson, Jose Cruz, Larry Dierker, and even Jimmy Wynn, good players. Do a wall of fame. But retiring their numbers puts them up there with Ryan, Biggio and Bagwell. You just retire number of solid players but not all time greats you water down the honor big time. Used to be a retired number was the highest honor next to the HOF. Now it's just something they do for a lot of guys who were good players. Yeah, fair enough. I'd agree with that. As big of a nerd as I fancy myself, I am not well versed in the retired numbers or honorary stuff of random other teams like that. |
|
